Im sick and tired of these bible thumping(or karan thumping slime) sending our young people to be slaughtered as well as slaughtering innocent men woman and children who only want to raise thier families.
One of these days we will wise up and send these scum to the hell they all deserve (BOTH SIDES) as well as the arms sales people and the manufacturers 0f these weapons.

What was so bad about Assad that merits the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people?
Do you think that guy who is going to replace him is going to be any better?
If you do, I have a bridge to sell you in NY!

We had heard we will conquer the skies, land, waters all we see. The skies too have gone after the tragedies we have . All look gloomy and sad. Is there any good news? An emergency layover in Syria's capital was bad enough. Then passengers on Air France Flight 562 were asked to open their wallets to check if they had enough cash to pay for more fuel. The plane, heading from Paris to Lebanon's capital, diverted amid tensions near the Beirut airport on Wednesday. Low on fuel, it instead landed in Damascus, the capital of neighbouring Syria, where a civil war is raging. An Air France spokesman explained Friday that the crew inquired about passenger cash only as a ``precautionary measure'' because of the ``very unusual circumstances.'' Sanctions against Syria complicated payment for extra fuel. He said Air France found a way to pay for the fill-up without tapping customer pockets, and apologized for the inconvenience. He wouldn't say how the airline paid, or how much. One woman aboard said the passengers had rounded up 17,000 euros. ``The pilot asked the passengers in first class to get their cash together. Everyone started to collect money, and they managed to collect 17,000, but the pilot in the end didn't take anything. They resolved the problems with the Damascus airport,'' said a passenger speaking on France-Info radio identified as May Bsat. The Boeing 777, carrying 185 people, took off for an overnight layover in Cyprus then landed safely in Beirut on Thursday. Lebanon is a volatile mix of pro- and anti-Syrian factions, and a series of hostage-takings has raised worries about Lebanon being dragged deeper into Syria's unrest. Mobs supporting Syrian President Bashar Assad blocked the main airport highway in Beirut on Wednesday, before Lebanese military units moved in. The layover was awkward for Air France, the flagship carrier for a country whose government toes a hard line against Syrian President Bashar Assad and warns all its citizens to avoid or leave Syrian soil. France, which once ruled Syria and Lebanon, championed European Union-wide economic sanctions on Syria including its national airline, Syria Air. Air France operated regular flights to Damascus until suspending them amid violence earlier this year. While it was the first time Air France said it had resorted to a request for passenger cash, it wasn't the first airline to do so. Hundreds of passengers traveling from India to Britain were stranded for six hours in Vienna last year when their Comtel Air flight stopped for fuel, and the charter service asked them to kick in more than 20,000 pounds($31,000) to fund the rest of the flight to Birmingham, England. Thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA WE ARE ALWAYS RIGHT

The entire Arab spring has been a total disaster for democracy. They are exchanging a stable economy and future for one that will be lead by Islamic fundamentalists.
None of the countries involved have ever regained their economies after the uprisings. All they do is visit Washington with their tin cups asking for handouts. is this the new mooslim way dependence on others?? Unable to fend for themselves

America is 236 years old. Our democratic republic is not perfect, but ever since that election in 1789, we have tried to create “a more perfect Union”.

However, suppose, for a moment, an alternative History in which the first free election in American History occurred in the year 6776 AD, when America was 5,000 years old. Suppose during those 50 Centuries, America had been ruled by various Kings, foreign powers and assorted Dictators and “Strongmen” who often ruled for decades at a time, without any permitted opposition. And then, in the year 6776 AD, America has a free election and foreign countries criticized us since they do not like who won the election. How would Americans react to that criticism?

Maybe now you can see where, say, Egypt is at this point in History. When Mohammed Morsi was elected President of Egypt, I believe that was after 5,000 years when the Pharaohs, Caesars, Greeks, Ottoman Turks, British and Mubarak had ruled Egypt, without much, if any input from the people.

Personally, I would have voted for Mohamed El-Baradei, the ex- Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (if he had run) but I am not Egyptian. When you walk a mile in another person’s shoes, then you can understand him.

Gee what a pipe dream analogy!!! Your not trying to seriously compare a free society that developed since 1607 to a continent that has never had a desire to be free. Lets be honest here Egypt's glory days are far far behind it. It will always be 4 centuries behind the US

"Your not trying to seriously compare a free society that developed since 1607 to a continent that has never had a desire to be free."

First, Robert specifically states that he's imagining a hypothetical America that had never been democratic.

Second, the Middle East has pretty obviously had a desire to be free. Do you think that they would have as enthusiastically supported the Arab Spring if they thought it was just going to be about replacing one dictator with another?

"the Arab spring has accomplished one thing replacing 1 set of dictators and despots for another."

We don't know that yet. All of the new leaders were voted in. Whether they'll all actually leave when they get voted out is unclear, but the point is that there still hasn't been any actual replacement.

The major problem with this analogy is that all of these places have changed demographically, religiously, geographically and economically over the course of history. They have never been homogenous. Furthermore, at times, these states didn't even have a recorded history of there own lands. The Sphinx wasn't even uncovered until 1817.

We in the modern era, with our combined knowledge of the past tend to place that same knowledge in the hands of those that did not have it. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Israel... All these nations didn't even exist before the early 19th century after the overthrow from the Ottoman Empire during WWI.

I mean Egypt didn't have ancient knowledge of Egypt until 1822 when Jean-François Champollion, in Paris, deciphered the Rosetta Stone and made it possible to read ancient Egyptian. The Epic of Gilgamesh wasn't translated from cuneiform until the 1870's. The vast majority of the knowledge we have of the ancient world did not exist until the present and here's the thing. Ancient Carthaginians were not the people that live in Libya today. After the sacking by Rome most Carthaginians fled to colonies they had in Spain and the modern day ME like Syria.

Did America think about such chaos and sectarian warfare in many neighboring countries prior to allow Jihadis of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Turkey and Libya to enter in Syria and start war against the legitimate Assad government? Looks like NO. Hillary-Obama only wanted to please Wahabi goons and Israelis to be happy in toppling Assad regime but now day by day the matter is becoming more and more serious; looks like they played under the Al Qaida's hands and allowed the terrorist goons to spread their holy war in the several Arab land. Lebanon is not only the one but soon it will spread in Pakistan, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Bahrain and finally in Saudi Arabia itself. Hope the WMD's of these countries remained safe from the western made terrorists.

Why must one immediately assume that America is responsible for whatever happens in the Middle East? It did intervene at various times, with some justification in the first Gulf War and for no good reason the second time under the clueless Bush making an absolute mess of a country that was not in very good shape to start with. In the case of Syria, the US has basically done very little other than push for sanctions against the murderous Assad regime. Obama has resisted pressure for military intervention and rightly so as it is unlikely it would do any more good than it did in Iraq. It is really up to the neighboring countries (Turkey, Jordan and Iran) to come up with a plan that could end the violence in Syria. No plan will succeed that keeps Assad in power. Obama will be more than happy to facilitate such a plan as long as it is not asking for US troops on the ground.

Get your facts straight about Obama. He has overtly said that he has authorized covert assistance to the Free Syrian Army.Not as you say..."In the case of Syria, the US has basically done very little other than push for sanctions against the murderous Assad regime..."

Please... Israelis? Of course with people of your ilk it's always the Israelis who are at fault. Don't you know that they own the United States. Ha! First of all Israel knows enough about the region to realize that extremist groups would infiltrate these so called Democratic revolutions if the word is possible in the Arab world and secondly, the Israelis were more than happy as long as their borders were secured to live with the Mubaraks and Assads of this world by not getting involved in these pseudo revolutions which can only breed the one thing the Arab Mediterranean world knows today. Extremist takeovers

I understand that the people screaming for help from the US are not necessarily the same people screaming for the death of the US. I understand that but as an American watching and reading the news I'm baffled by the logic disconnect. One of the major rallying cries of extremist Islam is the US military being in Muslim countries. So by blaming the US for not helping and blaming the US for trying to help we defacto, become the great satan no matter what we do.
So, when not helping and helping garners the same result the most logical thing to do is one of two options. Do absolutely nothing and leave them to there own devises or bomb them all into oblivion to quiet the noise. I'm all for doing nothing if that would make them happy but it won't. I'm all for helping if that would make them happy but it won't. The only thing that would make both Sunni and Shia happy with the US is if we turned on Israel. With that not being the likely choice I see no end to terrorist trying to attack the US no matter how much we ignore the ME. Thus, and purely along logical lines I only see one alternative to get to peace. Unfortunately, to my mind and as history is the best witness even this unspeakable alternative will not bring about a lasting peace.

I got that. What I didn't get is why you prefaced that point by stating: "I understand that the people screaming for help from the US are not necessarily the same people screaming for the death of the US."

In that quote, you seemed to have grasped the notion that there is not one singular, collective opinion held by all citizens of a nation or region. And yet, for the remainder of your post, you ignored that very thought. That's what baffles me.

It's one thing when a group of idiots "west baptist church or whatever there name is" screams this that and the other thing. It's quiet another when large segments of your people are killing themselves in order to kill you. And it's not just that. I know, I know... you're not able to rap your little mind around cause, effect and the relationship of objects but there's this.

Revolution after revolution one despot after another is being replaced with people that still want to kill all Jews and hate us for preventing that. All fine and good but to blame the US or western nations for not interfering in your countries activities as this women has is absurd. Why don't we interfere in the 100's of other nations ethnically cleansing each other? Nigeria, Congo, Turkmenistan... I mean things have been getting dicey in Romania again and they could be considered Western. So of course the logical next question is what is wrong in your head that you don't get we aren't the police for the world? What in your peanut sized brain are you missing from what I said?

Not true: I was curious about what seemed to be a contradiction in your post, and wanted to clarify what you meant. I did not agree with the majority of your post and so, before engaging in a discussion or debate on the topic, I wanted to get a better understanding of your position.

I agree it is irrelevant. As to my opinion it was clear enough for you to decide that you disagreed with it. Conversation isn't simply telling someone you disagree but supporting your disagreement with reason. Absent reason it isn't conversation but argument.

“Just to feel that someone cares, that we’re worth something,” seems to be the only reason offered to kick Assad out. It is the cry of a child seeking attention, of the beggar and of the owned slave trying to get some bigger portion of the pie by political means. No hint here of what the rebels will offer differently.
I read it as the way people are regarded as nothing more than as resources in the socialist state (the Baath parties of Iraq and Syria are arab nationalist with socialistic economic programs). No room for initiative, of individualism or of personal gain.

I don't know whether "wanting to be taken care of", is the Arab, maybe Islamic, equivalent of a Declaration of Dependency deeply ingrained in these societies or maybe is the result of 50 years of that kind of government but what is relevant is that the rebels offer some sort of better governmental vision. And no one in Europe or America has suggested that this alternative version lurks in the wings. Absent this vision, we should refrain from involvement.

There is a difference between wanting Assad gone (for which there are lots of reasons for people who have been oppressed for decades) and desiring support from outside (which could help, materially or, as this quote suggests, psychologically).

It is hardly a Declaration of Dependency to realize that, with the resources in hand, it is going to be a long fight with major losses. And to wish that you had more resources -- not, note someone else to do the job for you, but merely resources to help you do the job yourself. Just as it was not a Declaration of Dependency when that American revolutionaries sought help from France in their fight for freedom from England. Suggesting that asking for help is some kind of Arabic (or Islamic) "wanting to be taken care of" looks like simple ignorance of history, combined with prejudice and ignorance of the current situation in Syria.

People who are "dependent" do not take up small-arms and protests against a brutal military regime. There are many reasons to not get involved in the conflict; and there are several which would argue for it. But you have not identified one properly.
For the record their is no Ba'ath party of Iraq anymore. Though you are partially correct in many parts of the Middle East there is a focus on community and family gain. However I fail to see why this would be a reason not to help citizens being slaughtered by their government.

Just to feel that someone cares, that we’re worth something,” seems to be the only reason offered to kick Assad out.

From this blog which purports to be written by a Syrian university lecturer-

"As the crackdown continued with more bloodletting, dissent emboldened. If you are a person who saw your wife or your daughters being raped by security personnel in front of your eyes, your children’s fingernails removed or your babies thrown over the rooftop to their death, had your family killed, your house burnt, your land torched, your dignity systematically abused, what more would you need to carry a gun and declare war on such a corrupt police state?"